An International Open Access Journal
News Scroll
E-mail Alerts
Subscribe for TOC Alerts
Search Articles
sidebar
Creative Commons License

Abstract


org

Volume 7, Issue 3, June Issue - 2019, Pages:273-280


Authors: Ajay Verma, V Kumar, AS Kharab, GP Singh
Abstract: AMMI analysis of twenty three promising malt barley genotypes were evaluated at nine major locations of the country to interpret complex genotype by environment (GE) interactions. Combined analysis of variance indicated the larger and highly significant G×E interaction. Seven significant IPCA’s were used to calculate AMMI based measures.  Type 1 measures (EV1, ASTAB1, D1), considered G12, G8, G19, G20 as desirable genotypes and G9, G2 as of unstable performance; while type 2 (EV2, ASTAB2, D2 and ASV) considered G12, G10, G22, G15 as genotypes of choice and G9, G2 as unsuitable; type 3 (EV3, ASTAB3 and D3) pointed towards G22, G12, G23, G3 as of stable type along with G2, G9 of unstable type; type 5 measures  (EV5, ASTAB5, SIPC5 and D5)  selected G22, G12, G23, G3 genotypes and G2 & G9; type 7 utilized more than 97% of G×E interaction (EV7, ASTAB7, MASV and D7) identified  G22, G3, G12, G6 as genotypes of recommendations and G2 & G9 were detected as the unstable genotypes. AMMI based measures recommended genotypes G12, G13, G22 and G3 had the moderate yield performance while G19 was of high yield. Association analysis among measures by multivariate hierarchical Ward’s clustering approach grouped into three major clusters. Largest group clubbed as many as 16 measures while yield combined with IPCA2, and SIPC1, SIPC2, SIPC3, SIPC5, SIPC7 in second group.
[Download PDF]
Users Online: 31
Editorial Board
Indexed & Listed In
Track manuscript
Manuscript Statistics
Articles Statistics
Publication Statistics